Skip to main content
Glama

set_chooser_row_outcome

DestructiveIdempotent

Assign a UObject asset as the outcome for a specific row in a UChooserTable, then compile and save the table. Skips rows already bound to that asset.

Instructions

Set the FAssetChooser outcome (UObject reference) for a specific row in a UChooserTable, as one undo step, then compile and save the table; success is false, with save_error, when the save fails. A row already bound to that asset is left as it is (already_existed true, saved false).

Returns: { table_path: string, row_index: int, asset_path: string, already_existed: bool, saved: bool, save_error?: string }

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
row_indexYes0-based row index to assign the outcome to (must be within the OutputObject column's RowValues range).
asset_pathYesLong package path of the UObject to bind as the row's result via FAssetChooser (e.g. "/Game/MyAsset").
table_pathYesLong package path of an existing UChooserTable.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, but the description adds real value beyond them: it discloses the single undo step, the compile-and-save side effect, the save failure contract (success false with save_error), and the already_existed no-op branch. This is rich behavioral context.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded core action followed by the failure branch and the already-bound edge case, then an explicit returns block. Every sentence carries information; slightly dense but no waste.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

There is no output schema, but the description supplies the return shape inline (table_path, row_index, already_existed, saved, save_error) and describes the save-failure contract, so an agent has enough to call and interpret the result. Minor missing detail on what compile entails.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100% and each property already documents its type and constraints, so the baseline is 3. The description names row_index and asset_path in prose but adds no syntax or format meaning beyond the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb (set), the resource (FAssetChooser outcome / UObject reference), and the target (a specific row in a UChooserTable). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like set_chooser_column_default and add_chooser_row without opening any schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is implied by the outcome-binding purpose and the note that a pre-bound row is left unchanged, but there is no explicit when-to-use vs alternatives guidance and no named sibling to route to (e.g. set_chooser_column_default for column defaults). Adequate but with a clear gap.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server

Other Tools